Appeal No. 2003-1340 Page 8
Application No. 10/072,247
Claim 9 depends from claim 1 through claims 6 and 8, and requires that there be
at least four of the equally spaced longitudinal grooves added to claim 1 by the
intervening claims. It is the examiner’s view that while Holmgreen does not disclose or
teach such a limitation, it would have been obvious to provide these four grooves since
the appellant has not disclosed that this arrangement solves a stated problem or
provides an advantage over the prior art (Answer, page 5). However, be that as it may,
considering Holmgreen in view of Section 103 fails to cure the shortcoming discussed
above regarding the subject matter recited in claim 1, and therefore the rejection fails at
this juncture and will not be sustained.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007